(NaturalNews) In a groundbreaking new study just published in the peer reviewed journal Stem Cells, researchers at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Department of Oncology found that, despite killing half of all tumor cells per treatment, radiation treatments on breast cancer transforms other cancer cells into cancer stem cells which are vastly more treatment-resistant than normal cancer cells. The new study is yet another blow to the failed and favored mainstream treatment paradigm of trying to cut out, poison out or burn out cancer symptoms (tumors) instead of actually curing cancer.

Senior study author Dr. Frank Pajonk, associate professor of radiation oncology at the Jonsson Center, reported that induced breast cancer stem cells (iBCSC) "were generated by radiation-induced activation of the same cellular pathways used to reprogram normal cells into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) in regenerative medicine." Pjonk, who is also a scientist with the Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine at UCLA, added "It was remarkable that these breast cancers used the same reprogramming pathways to fight back against the radiation treatment."

First of all, we know that radiation causes mutations that can lead to cancer. In fact, that is part of the reason radiation is a good treatment, because it causes mutations that cause rapidly dividing tumor cells to die before healthy cells. Secondly, the timeline is not included in this article to encourage people to think about "natural" cures. There are no natural cures, ask steve jobs. We are only seeing a higher cancer incidence because we have the technology to do so.

Most importantly, this article ignores the timeline of cancer. Sure radiation treatment may cause you to develop cancer, but that could take 50 years. If you have any common sense, you would ignore this article and continue to listen to your doctor, or oncologists advice.

For those interested in the political disincentive of cancer cure, this video is a MUST WATCH! It tells the story of a doctor named Burzynski who created an alternative cure for cancer that is FAR more effective than any other treatment method, and he is put through the ringer by the MDA and FDA to steal his patent. When they failed, they tried to put him in prison.

To confirm by scientific study the intuitively obvious... is so comforting. But of course, high doses of intense, directed radiation kills the weak & mutates the strong. It is so refreshing to read that no less than a public University confirmed what is obvious. Moreover, they deduced why.

Science: wonder of wonders.

—

Disclaimer:Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul ☑

Here is an excellent thread summarizing the fact that extremely effective cancer treatments and cures have been available for decades and were suppressed by the medical establishment that makes BILLIONS on the disease.

What a shock....radiation causes cancer...and then they are surprised to find that radiation treatments make cancer worse? I have always held that opinion...considering my grandfather died of lung cancer and I saw how much chemo didnt help him. As per usual except for surgery a lot of modern medicine is quackery based on treating the symptoms rather than fixing the problem. You take your car to a mechanic to fix a squealing belt and he sprays some anti-squeal onto the belt. This is not the issue...the iasue ia that the harmonic balancer is going causing the crank pulley to wobble....the difference between fixing the problem and treating the symptom. That being said the naturaul medicine side of things is filled with a lot of quackery as well(not everything of course...but a lot) my dad died from workplace related melanoma and I saw just how well the natural treatments worked for him....although his was far advanced by the time they found it

Not saying this is false. But always be careful of extrapolating ONE STUDY onto everything.

I am all for natural medicine. However, do not believe for one second that there aren't also frauds in the alternative medicine community.

This is what frightens me about so many of the natural medicine people. You seem so willing to accept anything that contradicts what Big Pharma says. While I am happy you don't believe the lies of the medical-industrial complex, don't automatically assume someone else telling a different story is the right story.

There are people who will take advantage of your willingness to reject traditional medicine by feeding you bull$hit. I am NOT saying alternative medicine is a lie, but rather opportunists exist in EVERY field.

Someone below posted that "Big Pharma = no cure, not ever."

That is utterly and completely false. Yes they are absolutely guilty of pushing dangerous pills onto the public that may not even be effective. However not every creation out of Big Pharma is evil and not every creation is harmful.

For such believers in the free market, you guys are being pretty ignorant to believe that all of Pharma is evil. Would there not be also people who would deliver a good because consumers like that it works? If you end up in an ER for a massive open (compound) fracture, I hope you don't get any painkillers since they are manufactured by Big Pharma.....

The idiocy is mind boggling. By all means, free yourself of the medical-industrial complex. But don't chain yourself to an opportunist, either.

—

Pottawattamie County Iowa

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism." -Dr. Ron Paul

There is no incentive for businesses who profit from treating diseases to seek cures for diseases. For help finding a cure, you're on your own and you must educate yourself and trust no one. Very simple.

Under ObamaCare, this treatment would be "free". And possibly mandatory. And maybe worse than the disease.

And that is why we need to support the health freedom bills that RP has been proposing - in addition to supporting the total and permanent defeat of ObamaCare.

While I do not know how accurate this radiation claim is, I know that almost no health consumers, voters, health practitioners or government workers can prove these studies either way. But they will enforce their application.

There are many people who would want to refuse a treatment that might possibly have these side effects. In addition, there are others who might not want their tax or insurance money wasted to support a treatment that might destroy the health of strangers.

Be very careful with this sort of news story. You are generalizing a specific study. Here is the abstract. I don't have access to this journal from home to read the entire study to see if it is a legitimate study.

I am unaware of the caliber of this journal. The Lancet was a very well respect journal as well and a clown got a fraudulent study into it which has resulted in the death of thousands of children.

Here is the abstract that I assume the "Natural News" is referencing.

Abstract

Breast cancers are thought to be organized hierarchically with a small number of breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) able to re-grow a tumor while their progeny lack this ability. Recently, several groups reported enrichment for BCSCs when breast cancers were subjected to classical anticancer treatment. However, the underlying mechanisms leading to this enrichment are incompletely understood.

Using non-BCSCs sorted from patient samples, we found that ionizing radiation reprogrammed differentiated breast cancer cells into induced BCSCs (iBCSCs). iBCSCs showed increased mammosphere formation, increased tumorigenicity and expressed the same stemness-related genes as BCSCs from non-irradiated samples. Reprogramming occurred in a polyploid subpopulation of cells, coincided with re-expression of the transcription factors Oct4, Sox-2, Nanog, and Klf4, and could be partially prevented by Notch inhibition.

We conclude that radiation may induce a BCSC phenotype in differentiated breast cancer cells and that this mechanism contributes to increased BCSC numbers seen after classical anti-cancer treatment.

One of Wakefields colleagues just won a high court appeal.
"The judge said the GMC panel failed to address whether Prof Walker-Smith had been doing research or simply investigating symptoms to help treat children. There had been "inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion"http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/bmj-editor...

Hi new person -
There are multiple forums here on the DP and this is posted in the Health forum where it correctly belongs. The site owner constructed his site this way, and as you can see, others like to discuss information. Highly doubt it will be removed.

Not new. I've been reading this site since it began. Since this is a political site, the "Health" topic would be more regarding the govt's relationship to health care, as well as Ron Paul's stance on health related issues, in my interpretation.

This post is discouraging for a variety of reasons. Having this on the front page of DP makes us look to outsiders like loony conspiracy theorists. I understand the site it's linked to is reporting on a study, but I'm talking about the average joe's perception of the way this post is portrayed. The title is also misleading: the study is specifically about breast cancer, not all cancer, and I can personally testify that my closest family member is alive and well today because of radiation for another type of cancer. The best doctors in this country prescribe it as a first course of action because it is effective.

But mostly, we are on a very uphill mission to get the Paul campaign and its message to be taken seriously, and posts like this splashed across the front page simply aren't helping matters.

Government is very intertwined in health care, especially
cancer treatment.

"The best doctors in this country prescribe it as a first course of action because it is effective."

Your post shows that you know nothing about the politics behind cancer treatment or the poor success rates of radiation and chemo.

All of the supposed "best" economists are of the Keynesian school, which is taught throughout the US, yet we know it is faulty and has ruined the world's economies. Allopathic medicine is similarly faulty, and has ruined the world's health.

If these "best doctors" that you refer to are so great, why does the US rate like 46th in the world for the quality of health and longevity?

Seems you need to do much more learning about the realities of our faulty health care system and the government's involvement in it.

and something that the "average joe" would hear about from Dr. Gupta or any one of the other medical professionals that give out health tips on cable news TV? It is posts like this one that have helped me keep my young son's Crohn's Disease managed without having to give him the cancer-causing prescription drugs that are currently available to us.

Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer